From: Logical Language Group Message-Id: <199407251439.AA08317@access2.digex.net> Subject: Re: ciska bai tu'a zo bai To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 10:39:15 -0400 (ADT) Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net (Logical Language Group) In-Reply-To: <199407221722.AA21777@nfs1.digex.net> from "Chris Bogart" at Jul 22, 94 10:36:45 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1267 Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jul 25 10:39:35 1994 X-From-Space-Address: lojbab la kris. bogart. cusku di'e > Actually I changed my mind after reading the revised version. I think the > author meant to say that the attitudinal expresses how you feel in rank when > compared with the modified word -- quite the opposite from the Japanese > convention. Just so. The phrase "after the manner of the Japanese" existed in the original lojbab version of the paper, but (as you and others have rightly pointed out) the Japanese convention is quite different. The phrase was apparently meant to mean "representing what the Japanese think important" rather than "mirroring the representation conventions of Japanese". I had also previously thought that "ga'i[nai]" was meant to mirror the Japanese convention of use, but the Tribal Elders declared otherwise, so I changed the example -- the original version had no example. Eventually, I removed the reference to J. altogether. > Since the attitudinal is relative to the speaker it would never > (I presume) be correct to say "mi ga'i" or "mi ga'inai" since you can't be > ranked differently from yourself. Again quite different from Japanese. I think this is a valid corollary of the current rules. -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.